TITLE 6. CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONS

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SERVICES BOARD

Proposed Regulation

Title of Regulation: 6VAC20-65. Rules Relating to Professional Standards of Conduct and Procedures for Decertification (adding 6VAC20-65-10 through 6VAC20-65-40).

Statutory Authority: § 9.1-102 of the Code of Virginia.

Public Hearing Information: No public hearing is currently scheduled.

Public Comment Deadline: November 21, 2025.

Agency Contact: Kristi Shalton, Regulatory Coordinator, Department of Criminal Justice Services, 1100 Bank Street, Richmond, VA 23219, telephone (804) 786-7801, fax (804) 786-0410, or email kristi.shalton@dcjs.virginia.gov.

Basis: Section 9.1-102 of the Code of Virginia authorizes the Department of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS), under the direction of the Criminal Justice Services Board, to adopt regulations for the administration of Chapter 1 (§ 9.1-100 et seq.) of Title 9.1 of the Code of Virginia, including requiring the submission of reports and information by law-enforcement officers within the Commonwealth. Specifically, § 9.1-102 of the Code of Virginia authorizes the department to certify and decertify law-enforcement officers in accordance with §§ 15.2-1706 and 15.2-1707 of the Code of Virginia and to adopt statewide professional standards of conduct applicable to all certified law-enforcement officers and certified jail officers and appropriate due process procedures for decertification based on serious misconduct in violation of those standards.

Purpose: This action is essential to protect the safety and welfare of citizens in the Commonwealth because the regulation (i) establishes statewide professional standards of conduct applicable to all certified law-enforcement officers and certified jail officers and (ii) sets out appropriate due process procedures for decertification based on serious misconduct in violation of those standards, which benefits both officer safety and public safety throughout the Commonwealth.

Substance: Pursuant to Chapter 37 of the 2020 Acts of Assembly, Special Session I, this action establishes (i) statewide professional standards of conduct applicable to all certified law-enforcement officers and certified jail officers and (ii) appropriate due process procedures for decertification based on serious misconduct in violation of those standards.

Pursuant to Chapter 494 of the 2024 Acts of Assembly, proposed changes include (i) clarifying that initial-level decertification appeal hearings shall be handled in accordance with § 2.2-4019 of the Code of Virginia and that all subsequent appeal hearings beyond the initial level shall be handled in accordance with § 2.2-4020 of the Code of Virginia; and (ii) updating the Notification of Eligibility for Decertification form to allow for certified criminal justice training academies to submit information to DCJS about the potential decertification of a law-enforcement or jail officer recruit.

Issues: There are no anticipated disadvantages to the agency, the Commonwealth, or individual private citizens, businesses, or families. The primary advantages of this action include enhanced oversight for law-enforcement misconduct and clear decertification procedures for officers engaged in unethical or criminal behavior. Statewide professional standards of conduct clarify expectations for current and future law-enforcement officers, assure citizens that there are set procedures for police officers who violate those standards, and enhance officer public safety throughout the Commonwealth.

Department of Planning and Budget Economic Impact Analysis:

The Department of Planning and Budget (DPB) has analyzed the economic impact of this proposed regulation in accordance with § 2.2-4007.04 of the Code of Virginia and Executive Order 19. The analysis presented represents DPB's best estimate of the potential economic impacts as of the date of this analysis.¹

Summary of the Proposed Amendments to Regulation. Pursuant to two legislative mandates, the Department of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) proposes to make permanent an emergency regulation that establishes statewide professional standards of conduct for certified law enforcement and jail officers, designates serious misconduct warranting officer decertification, and establishes an administrative appeal process.

Background. Prior to Chapter 37 of the 2020 Acts of Assembly, Special Session I,² decertification of certified law-enforcement and jail officers was decentralized and handled by the employers (e.g., departments and localities) according to their own standards. Chapter 37 directs DCJS to establish statewide professional standards of conduct applicable to all certified law-enforcement officers and certified jail officers and appropriate due process procedures for decertification based on serious misconduct in violation of those standards. Pursuant to the legislative mandate, DCJS adopted emergency regulations effective March 14, 2024.³ Additionally, Chapter 494 of the 2024 Acts of Assembly⁴ require DCJS to provide for an administrative decertification review process (i.e., an appeal process for decertification). In this action, DCJS proposes to make the emergency regulation permanent and proposes to provide for initial-level and subsequent decertification appeal hearings to conform to Chapter 494. More specifically, the proposed regulation would make permanent (i) professional standards of conduct applicable to all certified law-enforcement officers and certified jail officers (e.g., enforce the Constitution of the United States, the laws of the United States, and the laws and Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia; treat all individuals with dignity and respect, regardless of race or ethnicity, color, religion, national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, disability, or other protected status, consistent with the Virginia Human Rights Act; etc.); (ii) designation of serious misconduct warranting officer decertification (e.g., knowingly, intentionally, or without a legitimate law-enforcement purpose, making misleading, deceptive, untrue, or fraudulent representations in the practice of being or becoming a law-enforcement officer or a jail officer; knowingly and intentionally abusing the power inherent to the law-enforcement and jail officer professions; etc.); and (iii) establishment of due process procedures for decertification resulting from serious misconduct (i.e., require written notification to DCJS for eligibility for decertification; require notice to the decertified officer and agency; etc.).

Estimated Benefits and Costs. Pursuant to the legislative mandates, the proposed regulation would make emergency regulation setting standards of conduct, designating serious misconduct, and setting out due process rights permanent. Centralization of the decertification process making standards statewide is known to have introduced administrative costs in terms of staff time to DCJS⁵ who is charged with this responsibility and has replaced possibly non-uniform standards with statewide uniform standards. However, these effects are the result of the legislation rather than this regulation. In this sense, the proposal's main economic effect is to conform regulations to the legislative mandates and provide clarification to the certified law-enforcement and jail officers as well as their employers on what the standards are, and what the due process requirements are. According to DCJS, adopting statewide professional standards of conduct make expectations clear to current and future law enforcement officers and assure citizens that there are set procedures for police officers that violate such standards.

Businesses and Other Entities Affected. All certified law-enforcement and jail officers are potentially subject to the proposed regulation. According to DCJS, there are approximately 39,400 such officers in the Commonwealth. Of these, 139 were decertified in 2024. None of the affected entities appear to be disproportionately affected. The Code of Virginia requires DPB to assess whether an adverse impact may result from the proposed regulation.⁶ An adverse impact is indicated if there is any increase in net cost or reduction in net benefit for any entity, even if the benefits exceed the costs for all entities combined.⁷ The proposed regulatory action clarify the standards of conduct, designate serious misconduct, and establish a due process. Thus, no adverse impact is indicated on account of the proposed rules.

Small Businesses⁸ Affected.⁹ The proposed amendments do not appear to adversely affect small businesses.

Localities¹⁰ Affected.¹¹ The proposed regulation does not introduce costs for localities, nor does it disproportionally affect any locality more than others.

Projected Impact on Employment. No impact on employment is expected on account of this proposed regulatory action by itself.

Effects on the Use and Value of Private Property. No effects on the use and value of property nor on real estate development costs is expected from the proposed regulatory text.

_____________________________

¹ Section 2.2-4007.04 of the Code of Virginia requires that such economic impact analyses determine the public benefits and costs of the proposed amendments. Further the analysis should include but not be limited to: (1) the projected number of businesses or other entities to whom the proposed regulatory action would apply, (2) the identity of any localities and types of businesses or other entities particularly affected, (3) the projected number of persons and employment positions to be affected, (4) the projected costs to affected businesses or entities to implement or comply with the regulation, and (5) the impact on the use and value of private property.

² https://legacylis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?202+ful+CHAP0037.

³ https://townhall.virginia.gov/L/ViewStage.cfm?stageid=9641.

⁴ https://legacylis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?241+ful+CHAP0494.

⁵ https://budget.lis.virginia.gov/amendment/2024/1/HB30/Introduced/CR/391/3c/.

⁶ Pursuant to § 2.2-4007.04 D: In the event this economic impact analysis reveals that the proposed regulation would have an adverse economic impact on businesses or would impose a significant adverse economic impact on a locality, business, or entity particularly affected, the Department of Planning and Budget shall advise the Joint Commission on Administrative Rules, the House Committee on Appropriations, and the Senate Committee on Finance. Statute does not define "adverse impact," state whether only Virginia entities should be considered, nor indicate whether an adverse impact results from regulatory requirements mandated by legislation.

⁷ Statute does not define "adverse impact," state whether only Virginia entities should be considered, nor indicate whether an adverse impact results from regulatory requirements mandated by legislation. As a result, DPB has adopted a definition of adverse impact that assesses changes in net costs and benefits for each affected Virginia entity that directly results from discretionary changes to the regulation.

⁸ Pursuant to § 2.2-4007.04, small business is defined as "a business entity, including its affiliates, that (i) is independently owned and operated and (ii) employs fewer than 500 full-time employees or has gross annual sales of less than $6 million."

⁹ If the proposed regulatory action may have an adverse effect on small businesses, § 2.2-4007.04 requires that such economic impact analyses include: (1) an identification and estimate of the number of small businesses subject to the proposed regulation, (2) the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other administrative costs required for small businesses to comply with the proposed regulation, including the type of professional skills necessary for preparing required reports and other documents, (3) a statement of the probable effect of the proposed regulation on affected small businesses, and (4) a description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the proposed regulation. Additionally, pursuant to § 2.2-4007.1 of the Code of Virginia, if there is a finding that a proposed regulation may have an adverse impact on small business, the Joint Commission on Administrative Rules shall be notified.

¹⁰ "Locality" can refer to either local governments or the locations in the Commonwealth where the activities relevant to the regulatory change are most likely to occur.

¹¹ Section 2.2-4007.04 defines "particularly affected" as bearing disproportionate material impact.

Agency Response to Economic Impact: The Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) agrees with the economic impact analysis (EIA) prepared by the Department of Planning and Budget (DPB), in that Chapter 37 of the 2020 Acts of Assembly, Special Session I, directed DCJS to establish statewide professional standards of conduct applicable to all certified law-enforcement officers and certified jail officers and appropriate due process procedures for decertification based on serious misconduct in violation of those standards. DCJS adopted emergency regulations effective March 14, 2024, that established these statewide professional standards of conduct. Additionally, Chapter 494 of the 2024 Acts of Assembly required DCJS to provide for an administrative decertification review process (i.e., an appeal process for decertification). The only discrepancy between DPB's EIA and how DCJS conducts and implements decertification procedures is in the Background provided in the EIA. Although this has no significant impact on an economic analysis of the regulation, DPB indicates that prior to Chapter 37, the decertification of certified law-enforcement and jail officers was decentralized and handled by the employers (e.g., departments and localities) according to the employer's own standards. This is incorrect. DCJS has always handled the decertification of certified law-enforcement and jail officers, though no statewide standards of conduct had existed. These were largely conducted after an arrest or prosecution of a former officer. DPB's assessment that the adoption of statewide professional standards of conduct make expectations clear to current and future law-enforcement and jail officers and ensure citizens that set procedures for consequences for police officers, jail officers, and sheriff deputies who violate such standards exist. This action replaces the emergency regulation that is set to expire. DCJS agrees with DPB's statements that the regulation neither introduces additional costs to localities nor causes any adverse impact on small businesses or other entities. DCJS supports DPB's assessment and is in agreement with the published EIA.

Summary:

Pursuant to Chapter 37 of the 2020 Acts of Assembly, Special Session I, this proposed action establishes (i) statewide professional standards of conduct applicable to all certified law-enforcement officers and certified jail officers and (ii) appropriate due process procedures for decertification based on serious misconduct in violation of those standards.

Pursuant to Chapter 494 of the 2024 Acts of Assembly, proposed amendments include (i) clarifying that initial-level decertification appeal hearings shall be handled in accordance with § 2.2-4019 of the Code of Virginia and that all subsequent appeal hearings beyond the initial level shall be handled in accordance with § 2.2-4020 of the Code of Virginia; and (ii) updating the Notification of Eligibility for Decertification form to allow for certified criminal justice training academies to submit information to the department about the potential decertification of a law-enforcement or jail officer recruit.

Chapter 65

Rules Relating to Professional Standards of Conduct and Procedures for Decertification

6VAC20-65-10. Definitions.

The following words and terms, when used in this chapter, shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:

"Agency administrator" means any chief of police, sheriff, or agency head of a state or local law-enforcement agency.

"Board" means the Criminal Justice Services Board.

"Department" means the Department of Criminal Justice Services.

6VAC20-65-20. Professional standards of conduct applicable to all certified law-enforcement officers and certified jail officers.

A. Pursuant to subdivision 61 of § 9.1-102 of the Code of Virginia, the department, under the direction of the board, shall adopt statewide professional standards of conduct applicable to all certified law-enforcement officers and certified jail officers and appropriate due process procedures for decertification based on serious misconduct in violation of this section.

B. All certified law-enforcement officers and certified jail officers must comply with the following standards:

1. Enforce the Constitution of the United States, the laws of the United States, and the laws and Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia;

2. Demonstrate exemplary commitment to obeying the laws of the United States and laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia and the policies of the employing agency for each certified law-enforcement officer or certified jail officer;

3. Treat all individuals with dignity and respect, regardless of race or ethnicity, color, religion, national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, disability, or other protected status, consistent with the Virginia Human Rights Act (§ 2.2-3900 et seq. of the Code of Virginia);

4. Ensure the preservation of human life and the constitutional right of liberty, equality, and justice;

5. Uphold public trust;

6. Maintain the highest ethical standards;

7. Take every reasonable opportunity to enhance and improve professional knowledge and competence; and

8. Hold oneself and others accountable to the adherence of the standards in this subsection.

6VAC20-65-30. Designation of serious misconduct warranting officer decertification.

Pursuant to § 15.2-1707 B of the Code of Virginia, the following types of misconduct by certified law-enforcement officers or certified jail officers are sufficiently serious as to warrant decertification when an officer of any rank is terminated or resigns from the officer's employing agency as a result of such misconduct, and the employer reports that information to the board.

1. Knowingly, intentionally, and without a legitimate law-enforcement purpose making misleading, deceptive, untrue, or fraudulent representations in the practice of being or becoming a law-enforcement officer or a jail officer, including:

a. Willfully falsifying or omitting any material information to obtain or maintain certification;

b. Obtaining a false confession or statement;

c. Filing a written police report containing a material false statement;

d. Making a false arrest;

e. Creating or using falsified evidence;

f. Failing to report known exculpatory and impeachment information in a criminal case to a superior officer in accordance with agency reporting requirements;

g. Tampering with, hiding, destroying, or attempting to tamper with, hide, or destroy evidence or potential evidence with the purpose of creating a false impression; and

h. Committing perjury.

2. Knowingly and intentionally abusing the power inherent to the law-enforcement and jail officer professions, including:

a. Intentionally and willfully exploiting an individual's disability or other impairment for the purposes of securing either a law-enforcement officer or jail officer outcome or personal benefit;

b. Tampering with a witness, victim, or informant;

c. Engaging in retaliation against any individual making a good-faith report of misconduct;

d. Engaging in a sexual relationship with an individual in the custody or care of the law-enforcement officer or jail officer or with an individual the officer knows or should have known is a victim, witness, defendant, or informant in an investigation or matter with which the officer is involved;

e. Intentionally, willfully, and without authorization disclosing confidential information or information that may compromise an official investigation;

f. Intentionally and without authorization using the employing agency's property, equipment, funds, or data for personal gain; and

g. Soliciting or otherwise knowingly participating in acts of bribery or extortion associated with the officer's official duties as defined in § 2.2-3103 of the Code of Virginia and in Articles 2 (§ 18.2-438 et seq.) and 3 (§ 18.2-446 et seq.) of Chapter 10 of Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia.

3. Knowingly and intentionally engaging in discriminatory policing or on-duty conduct toward incarcerated individuals, defined as an identified and uncorrected pattern of or a single egregious instance of on-duty conduct demonstrating bias on the basis of such characteristics as race or ethnicity, color, religion, national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, disability, or other protected status.

4. Knowingly and intentionally engaging in, failing to intervene when present and witnessing, or failing to report the use of excessive force in accordance with § 19.2-83.6 of the Code of Virginia, unless such information was obtained in the course of participating in a critical incident stress management or peer support team pursuant to § 32.1-11.3 of the Code of Virginia or disclosure would be in violation of § 19.2-274.1 of the Code of Virginia.

5. Knowingly and intentionally interfering with or obstructing compliance with the provisions of § 15.2-1707 of the Code of Virginia, including:

a. Failing to report, investigate, and act on as appropriate known serious misconduct by another officer; and

b. Failing to cooperate with an investigation into potential law-enforcement officer or jail officer misconduct.

6. Engaging in a pattern of acts or a single egregious act showing an intentional or reckless disregard for the rights, safety, or well-being of others, including repeated use of prohibited practices for law-enforcement officers during an arrest or detention or violations of individual rights as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, the laws of the United States, and the laws and Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia.

6VAC20-65-40. Due process procedures for decertification resulting from serious misconduct.

A. Written notification to the department, pursuant to § 15.2-1707 of the Code of Virginia, shall be submitted using the DCJS Notification of Eligibility for Decertification Form (DC-1), within 48 hours of becoming aware of an officer's eligibility for decertification.

B. The department shall serve notice upon the decertified officer and agency, to include decertification action taken and remedies available in accordance with § 15.2-1708 of the Code of Virginia.

C. Appeal hearings shall follow due process procedures and steps in accordance with §§ 15.2-1707 and 15.2-1708 of the Code of Virginia.

D. The initial-level decertification appeal hearing shall be handled in accordance with § 2.2-4019 of the Code of Virginia.

E. All subsequent decertification appeal hearings beyond the initial level shall be handled in accordance with § 2.2-4020 of the Code of Virginia.

FORMS (6VAC20-65)

Notification of Eligibility for Decertification, DC-1 (rev. 7/2024)